A former Iranian diplomat on the state of Iran’s nuclear program
Interview with Mousavian, June 25, 2025
Mousavian:
- The narrative of a “nuclear bomb” concerning Iran is a false, fabricated, and fake narrative by Israel and the Western world, used as a cover for main goals such as regime change.
- Direct and comprehensive negotiations between Iran and the U.S. are only useful when the U.S. acts with honesty and goodwill.
Host: Is the U.S. claim about destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities true?
Mousavian: Knowledge and technology cannot be destroyed. A military attack might damage buildings, facilities, and even centrifuges, but they can be rebuilt. However, technical knowledge cannot be eliminated.
Host: What are Iran’s objectives in its nuclear program? Is it pursuing a bomb?
Mousavian: Iran has never pursued the development of a nuclear bomb. The “nuclear bomb” narrative about Iran is a false, fabricated story by Israel and the Western world, used as a cover for their main objectives, like regime change. We saw a similar example in Iraq. The U.S. attacked Iraq, claiming to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, and later it became clear that no such weapons existed.
Host: If this narrative is false and fabricated, why did Iran build the Fordow facility under the mountains?
Mousavian: Because for decades, all U.S. presidents have threatened Iran with military attack and have officially stated that the military option is on the table. So it’s natural for Iran to build its nuclear facilities in a way that makes them safe from a U.S. military strike.
Host: Will Iran allow IAEA inspectors to visit nuclear facilities and assess the damage?
Mousavian: This time, the situation is entirely different because the U.S. and Israel have launched a military attack on Iran. It’s the first time in history that a non-nuclear country has been attacked militarily by two nuclear powers, and neither the UN Security Council nor the IAEA has taken any action. How can Iran trust them? Another issue lies with the IAEA itself. Even if Iran wants to cooperate, after such severe military attacks and destruction of its nuclear facilities, how can verification be possible? So the reality is that the recent military attacks have had entirely negative and counterproductive results and were an attack on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Host: If the wall of mistrust has been built, what is the alternative?
Mousavian: According to the IAEA statute, if the nuclear facilities of a non-nuclear state are attacked, the IAEA is obligated to support the attacked country. But you saw that in this recent case, the agency did nothing to support Iran.
For years, I’ve been proposing that Iran and the U.S. engage in direct and comprehensive dialogue. But such negotiations are only useful if the U.S. acts with honesty and goodwill. Therefore, I hope Mr. Trump sincerely engages in honest dialogue with Iran and stops these contradictory words and actions. One day, he says he wants diplomacy, and the next day, he launches a military attack. One day, he says he’s not pursuing regime change, and the next day, he says regime change is a suitable option. With such behavior, the Iranian side cannot trust him.